Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Everything Derozan

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • stooley wrote: View Post
    I don't really understand where you guys are coming from to be honest.

    It seems like if you have a really, really good team around DD, but who is still your best player, you can be successful.

    That's literally the only point that was made, and it's really not that far fetched.
    The problem is the presentation.

    I don't think anyone will argue the point because the key is the really, really good team surrounding him.

    Comment


    • mcHAPPY wrote: View Post
      The problem is the presentation.

      I don't think anyone will argue the point because the key is the really, really good team surrounding him.
      Right, fair enough.

      Our team could be really good too though!
      "Bruno?
      Heh, if he is in the D-league still in a few years I will be surprised.
      He's terrible."

      -Superjudge, 7/23

      Hope you're wrong.

      Comment


      • mcHAPPY wrote: View Post
        *repetitive headshakes*

        Is this really happening?
        I kicked the bees nest....sorry guys

        MACK11 wrote: View Post
        I don't know what McHappy's opinion on this is but I for one cannot see us being a contender ala OKC, SAS, MIA(with LBJ) with DeRozan being our best player, DD's ideal role is 2nd option. If we had someone like KD or another superstar player on his team DD's shooting % and his overall game would flourish because he is not the top gun.
        Here is a few questions:

        What do we know?

        DD has never been a really efficient player at any amount of usage. What makes his efficiency bearable right now is that his efficiency hasn't dropped off while playing at a very high usage, so he comes out better than most and by all account produces.

        But what happens when his usage drops?

        Well we know that his efficiency does not increase as his usage decreases. As a rule of thumb, the lower the usage a player uses, the more efficient he needs to be in order to be "good" compared to the league. Low usage, low efficiency players don't last in the NBA.

        Now, DD will not be a low usage guy, but say he is a moderate usage second fiddle, hovering around 20%. Now, he probably won't be more than the average efficient that he currently produces.

        So the real question is:

        Does a moderate usage, average efficiency player sound like a great offensive second fiddle?

        Comment


        • So much arguing over one little theory that was brought up.

          Sent from my XT1032 using Tapatalk
          You come at the King, you best not miss.

          Comment


          • OldSkoolCool wrote: View Post
            I kicked the bees nest....sorry guys



            Here is a few questions:

            What do we know?

            DD has never been a really efficient player at any amount of usage. What makes his efficiency bearable right now is that his efficiency hasn't dropped off while playing at a very high usage, so he comes out better than most and by all account produces.

            But what happens when his usage drops?

            Well we know that his efficiency does not increase as his usage decreases. As a rule of thumb, the lower the usage a player uses, the more efficient he needs to be in order to be "good" compared to the league. Low usage, low efficiency players don't last in the NBA.

            Now, DD will not be a low usage guy, but say he is a moderate usage second fiddle, hovering around 20%. Now, he probably won't be more than the average efficient that he currently produces.

            So the real question is:

            Does a moderate usage, average efficiency player sound like a great offensive second fiddle?
            Nah. The real question is: Does a Wookiee know his cliche robed number crunching, or basketball?

            Comment


            • OldSkoolCool wrote: View Post
              I kicked the bees nest....sorry guys



              Here is a few questions:

              What do we know?

              DD has never been a really efficient player at any amount of usage. What makes his efficiency bearable right now is that his efficiency hasn't dropped off while playing at a very high usage, so he comes out better than most and by all account produces.

              But what happens when his usage drops?

              Well we know that his efficiency does not increase as his usage decreases. As a rule of thumb, the lower the usage a player uses, the more efficient he needs to be in order to be "good" compared to the league. Low usage, low efficiency players don't last in the NBA.

              Now, DD will not be a low usage guy, but say he is a moderate usage second fiddle, hovering around 20%. Now, he probably won't be more than the average efficient that he currently produces.

              So the real question is:

              Does a moderate usage, average efficiency player sound like a great offensive second fiddle?
              Looks like the only logical solution is to ship out DD for Dion Waiters.

              Comment


              • Again, the point of the statement was not to state whether DeRozan is or isn't as good as Melo. The point was to evaluate whether a player with DeRozan's production from last year can be the focal scoring point on a contender. It appears that this is the case with a strong enough supporting cast.

                Some of you (*cough* mcHAPPY *cough* OldSkoolCool) are just arguing with me for the sake of it because we've had several arguments in the past on a range of topics.

                Comment


                • imanshumpert wrote: View Post
                  Again, the point of the statement was not to state whether DeRozan is or isn't as good as Melo. The point was to evaluate whether a player with DeRozan's production from last year can be the focal scoring point on a contender. It appears that this is the case with a strong enough supporting cast.

                  Some of you (*cough* mcHAPPY *cough* OldSkoolCool) are just arguing with me for the sake of it because we've had several arguments in the past on a range of topics.
                  I recently read a piece by Bill Simmons which asked the question if Melo could be the best player on a contender. (http://grantland.com/features/carmel...knicks-legacy/) I think that comparing DD to Melo is a little flawed in that he has never been on a team that truly CONTENDED. Part of this is that his teams have not been very good aside from him. I would disagree with some of what you are saying, but it's an interesting case.

                  Comment


                  • imanshumpert wrote: View Post
                    Again, the point of the statement was not to state whether DeRozan is or isn't as good as Melo. The point was to evaluate whether a player with DeRozan's production from last year can be the focal scoring point on a contender. It appears that this is the case with a strong enough supporting cast.

                    Some of you (*cough* mcHAPPY *cough* OldSkoolCool) are just arguing with me for the sake of it because we've had several arguments in the past on a range of topics.
                    One of you (*cough*imanshumpert*cough*) is an attention seeking whore.

                    You've created a one sided argument just for the sake of arguing. Look through the discussion. Some people voiced a different point of view (I didn't even do that, I just clicked "like" to a couple of posts) and you went on the offensive telling people not to get upset. Then when someone who agrees with you posts you reply thanking them for using logic and reasoning.... otherwise known as a passive aggressive insult to two people who have an opposing view and another person who "liked" their posts.

                    Your point is well known and understood (as an aside, are you even reading people's response?). It is just all your points are the same: DeRozan is amazing and is not a franchise player but look! look! look everybody! how his numbers compare to this player or this team that had success but, but, but he is not a franchise player and is not paid like one!


                    So what is the lesson here? imanshumpert is not happy unless he is arguing about DeRozan.

                    Comment


                    • OldSkoolCool wrote: View Post
                      I kicked the bees nest....sorry guys



                      Here is a few questions:

                      What do we know?

                      DD has never been a really efficient player at any amount of usage. What makes his efficiency bearable right now is that his efficiency hasn't dropped off while playing at a very high usage, so he comes out better than most and by all account produces.

                      But what happens when his usage drops?

                      Well we know that his efficiency does not increase as his usage decreases. As a rule of thumb, the lower the usage a player uses, the more efficient he needs to be in order to be "good" compared to the league. Low usage, low efficiency players don't last in the NBA.

                      Now, DD will not be a low usage guy, but say he is a moderate usage second fiddle, hovering around 20%. Now, he probably won't be more than the average efficient that he currently produces.

                      So the real question is:

                      Does a moderate usage, average efficiency player sound like a great offensive second fiddle?
                      The problem with that logic is that you assume that the reason DeMar's efficiency doesn't improve with extra usage is that he's just different than the rest of the league. What if the reason that his efficiency has stayed the same with increased usage last year is because he actually improved his efficiency overall?

                      Therefore, if/when his usage goes back down again, his efficiency will go back up with it.

                      I'm not saying it's a definite or that you're wrong, but it is possible.
                      That is a normal collar. Move on, find a new slant.

                      Comment


                      • imanshumpert wrote: View Post
                        Again, the point of the statement was not to state whether DeRozan is or isn't as good as Melo. The point was to evaluate whether a player with DeRozan's production from last year can be the focal scoring point on a contender. It appears that this is the case with a strong enough supporting cast.

                        Some of you (*cough* mcHAPPY *cough* OldSkoolCool) are just arguing with me for the sake of it because we've had several arguments in the past on a range of topics.
                        Well for the record, I'm not even disagreeing with your premise necessarily. I could see the Raptors playing in the Eastern Conference Finals as soon as next Spring with DeRozan as their lead option on offence. I just think dropping a few largely out of context statistics with him and Melo doesn't really prove anything. And if the caveat is that he needs to have an amazing supporting cast around him then I'd say you're just pointing out the obvious then. Better team = better record is common sense.

                        You could just as easily dig up a team that won 24 games with a Derozan-like player leading the charge, and that wouldn't "prove" anything either. None of it means anything as basketball simply doesn't work that way. Each season is different; different supplementary players finding different chemistry, different match ups with other teams, different breaks along the way, injuries, luck, etc. That's why it's frustrating to read all of the "Player A had such and such a stat line and won so many games so because player B did the same thing the Raptors are destined to follow suit!" I mean there's a post on the main page that says Klay Thompson = Terrence Ross because they had similar shooting percentages during their second years. That's insane. Stop trying to extrapolate all of the Raptors into greatness. Some of these guys won't live up to expectations. Some of them will exceed them. And the answers aren't hidden in a spread sheet somewhere.

                        Like I said earlier, we don't need to scour basketball reference to see what a team with a 'player like DD' is capable of… we're able to observe a team that has a player exactly like DeRozan (spoiler: it's actually DD) and see what they accomplished last season and going forward. That's the only real proof that we should be interested in.
                        Last edited by Fully; Fri Jul 25, 2014, 09:56 AM.

                        Comment


                        • Fully wrote: View Post
                          Well for the record, I'm not even disagreeing with your premise necessarily. I could see the Raptors playing in the Eastern Conference Finals as soon as next Spring with DeRozan as their lead option on offence. I just think dropping a few largely out of context statistics with him and Melo doesn't really prove anything. And if the caveat is that he needs to have an amazing supporting cast around him then I'd say you're just pointing out the obvious then. Better team = better record is common sense.

                          You could just as easily dig up a team that won 24 games with a Derozan-like player leading the charge, and that wouldn't "prove" anything either. None of it means anything as basketball simply doesn't work that way. Each season is different; different supplementary players finding different chemistry, different match ups with other teams, different breaks along the way, injuries, luck, etc. That's why it's frustrating to read all of the "Player A had such and such a stat line and won so many games so because player B did the same thing the Raptors are destined to follow suit!" I mean there's a post on the main page that says Klay Thompson = Terrence Ross because they had similar shooting percentages during their second years. That's insane. Stop trying to extrapolate all of the Raptors into greatness. Some of these guys won't live up to expectations. Some of them will exceed them. And the answers aren't hidden in a spread sheet somewhere.

                          Like I said earlier, we don't need to scour basketball reference to see what a team with a 'player like DD' is capable of… we're able to observe a team that has a player exactly like DeRozan (spoiler: it's actually DD) and see what they accomplished last season and going forward. That's the only real proof that we should be interested in.
                          Ok man, dumb comparison. I thought it would be interesting, but clearly it wasn't (except to Stooley) and stirred up trouble. I'll stop comparing DD to other players and focus on what he does for Toronto.

                          I guess this discussion would only really be valid if we had the exact same supporting cast as the 2008-09 Nuggets, since we don't I suppose it's a waste of time.

                          Comment


                          • I forgive you.

                            Comment


                            • Fully wrote: View Post
                              I forgive you.
                              I'm not asking for forgiveness, just admitting that bringing up the topic wasn't really a way to generate a productive discussion.

                              Comment


                              • Fully wrote: View Post
                                Well for the record, I'm not even disagreeing with your premise necessarily. I could see the Raptors playing in the Eastern Conference Finals as soon as next Spring with DeRozan as their lead option on offence. I just think dropping a few largely out of context statistics with him and Melo doesn't really prove anything. And if the caveat is that he needs to have an amazing supporting cast around him then I'd say you're just pointing out the obvious then. Better team = better record is common sense.

                                You could just as easily dig up a team that won 24 games with a Derozan-like player leading the charge, and that wouldn't "prove" anything either. None of it means anything as basketball simply doesn't work that way. Each season is different; different supplementary players finding different chemistry, different match ups with other teams, different breaks along the way, injuries, luck, etc. That's why it's frustrating to read all of the "Player A had such and such a stat line and won so many games so because player B did the same thing the Raptors are destined to follow suit!" I mean there's a post on the main page that says Klay Thompson = Terrence Ross because they had similar shooting percentages during their second years. That's insane. Stop trying to extrapolate all of the Raptors into greatness. Some of these guys won't live up to expectations. Some of them will exceed them. And the answers aren't hidden in a spread sheet somewhere.

                                Like I said earlier, we don't need to scour basketball reference to see what a team with a 'player like DD' is capable of… we're able to observe a team that has a player exactly like DeRozan (spoiler: it's actually DD) and see what they accomplished last season and going forward. That's the only real proof that we should be interested in.
                                To be fair, I've heard a lot of people say that we won't get far without a true superstar. That DD can never be the best player on a contending team, etc.

                                I don't think it's a completely unprovoked post. It's just addressing issues that have been brought up before.
                                "Bruno?
                                Heh, if he is in the D-league still in a few years I will be surprised.
                                He's terrible."

                                -Superjudge, 7/23

                                Hope you're wrong.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X